Enterprise AI Symposium at BAU: Ethics, Security and Integration in Artificial Intelligence

For a student preparing for university, being able to explain why an answer is correct is just as important as reaching the correct answer. When working with artificial intelligence tools, this distinction becomes more visible. Reading a ready-made explanation is not the same as understanding the subject and being able to explain it in one's own words. Artificial intelligence literacy requires the student to evaluate the tool they are using and to maintain responsibility for their own thinking process.

The pedagogical model introduced by Bahçeşehir College addresses the use of artificial intelligence according to students' developmental stages. The model does not include the direct use of generative artificial intelligence by preschool and primary school students in the school environment. It aims to develop critical and ethical use skills under teacher guidance in middle school, and to evaluate artificial intelligence as a tool that supports research and problem-solving processes in high school. In measurement and evaluation, it is planned to focus on the thinking and reasoning process along with the product produced by the student.

What should artificial intelligence literacy encompass?

It would be a narrow approach to view artificial intelligence literacy merely as the ability to write prompts for the tool. The student's real need is to know how to examine the response they receive and how to relate it to their learning objectives.

This examination can begin with a few questions: Does the response address the question? Are the concepts used explained? Are there reasons supporting the result? Which information needs to be verified? Seeking answers to these questions encourages the student to read the text carefully and form their own evaluation.

Explaining an explanation in one's own words can also be a useful checking method. Students may notice the points they struggle with when explaining the response they read. Thus, they can determine the next study step based on misunderstood concepts or missing connections.

Preserving the thinking process in university preparation

University preparation should not be planned solely around increasing the number of questions solved. Understanding why a wrong question was answered incorrectly can make the study process more conscious. Lack of knowledge, misinterpreting the question, and calculation errors lead to different study needs.

For example, a student can first try to solve the question on their own. They can then explain their solution path and identify the step they struggled with. The teacher's guidance and the tools used can be evaluated based on this concrete need. This example is a suggested study routine; it is not a specific practice announced by the institution.

Critical thinking also requires the student to examine their own answer. Questions like "How did I reach this conclusion?" and "Is another explanation possible?" prevent learning from being evaluated solely based on the result.

Teacher and family guidance

The purpose of the tools used in the study routine must be clear. Talking about in which situations the student received help, which part they did on their own, and how they demonstrated what they learned makes expectations clear.

For families, questions to ask about daily studies can also support this approach. Instead of only asking how many questions were solved, attention can be paid to which subject was understood, where difficulties were experienced, and what to focus on the next day.

Communication with the teacher can help accurately define the student's needs. When deciding on the use of a tool, the objective of the lesson, the conditions of the homework, and the student's current level of knowledge should be considered together.

The model of Bahçeşehir College brings the preservation of thinking skills in university preparation to the fore. A practical starting point for students could be to explain the subject they learned in their own sentences at the end of each study session. Points that cannot be explained indicate the next learning target. Artificial intelligence literacy also gains meaning in this process through conscious questioning, evaluating the response, and taking responsibility for learning.